[MD] Free Will
MarshaV
valkyr at att.net
Sun Jun 26 21:44:14 PDT 2011
Hi Steve,
I'm no expert, but I've been exposed to neither/nor logic, as a non-dualistic
logic, through my reading of Buddhist philosophy. It seems to me it places
the issue of freewill into the metaphor of horns of a rabbit. The abstract
concept is dissolved and one is sent back to awareness/experience. In
conversation I would state it just like I did in the sentence.
Marsha
On Jun 26, 2011, at 6:59 PM, Steven Peterson wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 12:09 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> How about neither accepting free will, nor rejecting freewill.
>>
>> Marsha
>
> Hi Marsha,
>
> I think that is somewhat what Pirsig does in Lila. He raises the issue
> of free will but doesn't accept either horn of the dilemma as
> traditionally posed. But isn't that the same as denying both horns?
> I'm wondering how one does what you say in conversation. Most people
> would probably say that if you don't accept it you reject it. But if
> the question is one of those "do you still beat your wife?" kind of
> questions, you can't answer it directly. You either need to back up
> and reconstruct the problem on different terms or change the subject.
> I think Pirsig kind of does both. He resolves the issue by talking
> about freedom instead of free will since he doesn't want to accept the
> metaphysical premise of an independent agent that could be the
> possessor of this free will.
>
> Best,
> Steve
___
More information about the Moq_Discuss
mailing list